Pol. J. Environ. Stud. Vol. 24, No.

2 (2015), 695-699
DOI: 10.15244/pjoes/28357

Original Research
A Study on Structural Applicability of Flyash
Bricks with Quarry Dust – an Ecofriendly
Alternative for Clay Bricks

Balaraju Sivagnanaprakash1*, Palaniswamy Murthi2, Alan Sekaran1

1
Department of Civil Engineering, R.V.S Technical Campus, Coimbatore, TamilNadu, India
2
Vivekananda College of Engineering for Women, Tiruchengode, TamilNadu, India

Received: 2 June 2014

Accepted: 3 August 2014

Abstract

An environmentally sustainable system must maintain a stable resource base avoiding over-exploitation
of non-renewable resource systems. Despite the omnipresence of clay brick and fly ash brick, environmental
knowledge about its composition and properties is still scarce. This paper studies the hazards in clay brick and
advantages in fly ash brick extending with a comparative study on material properties of clay brick and fly ash
brick. The fly ash brick (QFAC brick) used for this study is composed of fly ash, quarry dust, and cement.
QFAC brick made of fly ash was found to be an eco-friendly material protecting the environment through con-
servation of topsoil, reduction in carbon emissions, and utilization of waste products like fly ash and quarry
dust. Compressive strength, tensile strength, durability, water absorption, impact resistance, and thermal con-
ductivity of QFAC bricks were investigated and compared with conventional clay bricks. The compressive
strength of QFAC brick was 15% higher than that of clay bricks. The flexural strength of QFAC brick was
found to be twice that of clay brick. The average water absorption of QFAC brick was as low as 10%. The
QFAC brick also possessed high impact resistance and high durability. The thermal conductivity of QFAC
brick was as low as that of clay bricks. Hence QFAC bricks are a superior replacement and environmentally
sustainable material for clay bricks.

Keywords: non-renewable resource, clay brick, QFAC brick, sustainable material

Introduction quences, as a result of which barren lagoons have replaced

The building construction sector consumes conven-
tional materials such as brick, clay, sand, gravel, and
cement, etc., which are generated directly or indirectly
from natural resources [1]. Bricks made out of clay are a
product that proved its credence since the dawn of civi-
lization. There is a worldwide shortage of natural resource
material for the production of conventional bricks [2].
These resources are over tapped, unmindful of the conse-
*e-mail: sivagnanaprakash@ymail.com
vast stretches of erstwhile fertile land. Advancement in
material engineering has yet to render earth obsolete as a
building material in both financial- and resource-chal-
lenged places [3]. Furthermore, production of convention-
al brick involves a firing process that generates atmos-
pheric pollution [4]. An issue arising out of these activities
plays a vital role in the search for innovative, environmen-
tally friendly, and ready-to-use building composites that
combine higher efficiency and quality in the building
process with improved thermal resistance [5]. The urge to
use eco-friendly, low-cost, and lightweight construction
696 Sivagnanaprakash B., et al.

materials in the building industry has brought the need to Table 1. Chemical composition of Class F Fly ash.
investigate fly ash bricks by benefiting the environment as No. Constituent Value
well as maintaining the material requirements affirmed in
the standard [6]. 1. Silica SiO2 54.92
The technology for producing fly ash bricks is easily 2. Alumina Al2O3 23.04
adaptable by existing clay brick factories. Furthermore, it
3. Iron Fe2O3 6.62
requires less man power and less area for material process-
ing than in the case of clay brick production [7]. Fly ash 4. Calcium Oxide CaO 3.84
brick plays a major role in the abetment of carbon-dioxide,
5. Magnesium Oxide MgO 2.82
a harmful greenhouse gas mass emission, that is threatening
to throw the earth’s atmosphere out of balance. This 6. Loss on Ignition LOI% 2.88
resource material, if not managed properly, may pose envi-
ronmental challenges [8]. The applications of fly ash
includes cellular concrete products, lightweight aggregates,
manufacture of cement and asbestos, road construction and Methodology
embankment, backfill, land development, bricks, blocks,
and masonry walls [9]. Fly ash brick reduces up to 30% the Due to the scarcity of conventional masonry materials
use of cement mortar during laying and plastering, reducing and energy-related issues, alternative masonry materials are
the cost of construction. As no clay is used in the manufac- promoted [12]. Several studies have focused on improving
ture of fly ash bricks, the scope of efflorescence is negligi- and stabilizing the development and production of these
ble. It continues gaining strength as the ages of curing kinds of bricks in terms of strength, shrinkage, thermal con-
increase. Loss due to breakage under standard working ductivity, and durability to meet building standards [13].
conditions is less than one percent. Fly ash brick has more In this paper conventional clay brick of size
or less equal weight as that of conventional clay brick. It 230×100×75 mm and QFAC brick of size 230×105×75 mm
weighs around 3 to 3.2 kg per brick. A sustainable environ- were taken for comparative study. The material properties
ment can be promoted by proper consumption or recycling such as compressive strength, flexural strength, water
waste materials. The recent decades have witnessed the absorption, impact resistance on bricks, and durability were
increase in number of studies which are being done on recy- determined on clay bricks and QFAC bricks during days 7,
cling the waste, particular on potential alternatives to build- 14, 21, and 28 of curing.
ing materials. Brick with good acid resistivity finds its Compressive strength is an important property of brick
application in industries such as chemicals, steel, and met- and its value should not be less than 3.5 MPa for a standard
alworking, pharmaceuticals, pulp and paper, food and bev- brick. Water absorption indicates the quantity of water
erage, public utilities, etc. Chemical-resistant brick pro- absorbed, proving the brick to be more permeable [14]. The
vides thermal, mechanical, and chemical protection for compressive strength and water absorption tests were con-
these kinds of industries. When properly processed, waste ducted as per IS 3495 (Parts 1 and 2): 1992 [15].
materials can effectively function as construction materials The flexural strength represents the highest stress expe-
that readily meet design specifications [10]. Fly ash utiliza- rienced within the material at the moment of rupture. The
tion in the country is gaining momentum owing to the strin- single point load flexural strength test was conducted as per
gent regulations that India’s Ministry of Environment and ASTM: C67-13 [16]. Flexural strength of alternative build-
Forests has stipulated to increase the benefits of using fly ing materials is important to evaluate the performance
ash for various products [11]. when subjected to lateral loads due to wind, flood, or any

Manufacturing QFAC Bricks

QFAC brick was made out of 40% class F fly ash, 10%
cement, and 50% quarry dust. The materials needed for
manufacturing QFAC brick are class F Fly ash, ordinary
Portland cement, and quarry dust. The materials are mixed
thoroughly in dry state in a pan mixture. Water is added to
the required consistency and the mixture is fed into the
molding machine. In the moulding machine the mixture is
compressed hydraulically or mechanically from 125 mm
thickness to 75 mm thick, getting the size of 230×105×75.
The moulded brick is kept in a closed environment for a day
and then stacked in the open air and water cured.
Manufactured QFAC bricks are shown in Fig. 1. The chem-
ical composition of the class F fly ash from a thermal power
plant is shown in Table 1. Fig. 1. QFAC bricks.
A Study on Structural Applicability... 697

other load that can cause out-of-plane bending in a wall. 2,5

2,299
The impact resistance of QFAC and clay bricks was deter-
2,018

(N/mm2)
mined by field test. 2

Strength(N/mm 2
)
1,736
Thermal conductivity is a measure of the inherent abil-
1,5
ity to transfer heat. The lower thermal conductivity indi-

FlexuralStrength
1,112 1,112 1,112 1,112
cates the greater insulating effect of the material. The ther- QFAC brick
1
1,032 clay brick
mal conductivity test was conducted on brick walls in order

Flexural
to investigate the heat transfer which has a vital role in envi- 0,5
ronmental thirst. The walls were heated on one side up to
80-90ºC for a period of 3 hours in the laboratory and the 0
0 7 14 21 28
temperature was noted on both sides for the next 3 hours
Number of days of curing
without heating. The sensors were placed on both sides of
Fig. 3. Comparison of flexural strength in bricks.
the wall and the temperature differences were recorded
[17].
Finally the durability is determined for both QFAC
20
brick and clay brick using sulphuric acid and hydrochloric 18
acid. Various percentages such as 1%, 2%, and 3% acid 16 18 18 18 18

Water Absorption (%)

solutions were used for conducting the acid resistivity test. 14
The percentage of erosion was represented graphically and 12 14,2 QFAC brick
13,5
the results of QFAC bricks were compared with clay bricks 10 clay brick
11,1
[18]. 8
6 7,96
4
2
Results and Discussion 0
0 7 14 21 28
It is important in masonry design to determine the Number of days of curing

appropriate ultimate strength of the masonry units. The
results of compressive strength, flexural strength, water
absorption, impact resistance on bricks, and durability of
clay bricks and QFAC bricks were graphed and discussed.
The compressive strength of QFAC brick progressively
increased from 3.44 N/mm2 to 7.95 N/mm2 during the cur-
ing period of 7 days and 28 days, respectively, which is
shown in Fig. 2. The compressive strength of clay bricks
remained the same (6.75 N/mm2) for all 28 days of curing.
The compressive strength of a 28-day-cured QFAC brick
was found to be 15% higher than the best standard clay
brick.
The flexural strength of QFAC brick exhibited a similar
result to that of compressive strength. The flexural strength
increased from 1.032 N/mm2 to 2.299 N/mm2 (Fig. 3) dur-
ing the curing period from 7 days to 28 days, whereas flex-
ural strength of clay brick remained constant and also the
strength resulted higher for QFAC brick when compared to
clay bricks. The 28 days cured QFAC bricks had 2 times
9
7,95
8
(N/mm2))
Fig. 4. Comparison of water absorption in bricks.
higher flexural strength than the clay bricks. From the result
it is evident that the fly ash brick masonry can withstand
higher flexural load than the clay bricks. Water absorption
is a major factor for the durability of bricks. The high
absorption of water would contribute to a rapid deteriora-
tion of the material. Water absorption of QFAC bricks was
lower compared to clay brick during all the days of testing;
this may result in a reduction of damping. The water
absorption of QFAC bricks decreased from 14.2% to 7.96%
as the days of curing increased from 7 days to 28 days (Fig.
4), whereas that of clay brick remained the same at 18%.
Brick with 8% average water absorption is 10 times more
durable in resisting salt attack than that with water absorp-
tion of 20%. To mitigate the adverse effects but at the same
time retain the advantages associated with porosity, the
water absorption of facing bricks for masonry brickwork
should preferably be maintained at around 10%. This
explains why brick walls require comparatively minimum
maintenance in the course of time.

In addition, from the field impact resistance test result

2

6,75 6,75 6,75

Strength (N/mm

6,75
7
6,12
on both clay brick and QFAC brick, the number of broken
6
Compressive Strength

pieces was found to be 3 for QFAC bricks and that for Clay
5 4,92
bricks was 7 (Fig. 5). From this result it can be inferred that
4 QFAC brick
3,44 QFAC bricks have better impact resistance than clay bricks.
Compressive

3 clay brick
Thermal conductivity is an important criterion of
2
masonry materials, as the thermal conductivity influences
1
the use of the material in engineering applications. The
0
0 7 14 21 28 thermal conductivity of a brick is the rate at which a brick
Number of days of curing conducts heat [19]. Decreasing the thermal conductivity of
Fig. 2. Comparison of compressive strength in bricks. building material will lead to significant savings in the con-
 698 Sivagnanaprakash B., et al.

sumed energy by heating and air-conditioning [20]. The 4

thermal conductivity test results showed a similar behavior 3,436
3,5 3,274
in both clay bricks and QFAC bricks (Fig. 6). This implies 2,935 2,94
3
2,59

Loss in Weight %
that the thermal property of QFAC bricks was equally good 2,5 2,16
69
when compared with conventional clay bricks. The dura-
2
bility of QFAC brick was also found to be higher when
1,5
compared to clay brick. The loss of weight exhibited by Clay Brick
B
1
QFAC brick varied from 2.169% to 2.94%, which was less QFAC
C Brick
when compared to clay brick for all concentrations of 0,5

hydrochloric acid used – namely 1%, 2%, and 3% (Fig. 7). 0

1% 2% 3%
A similar behavior was observed with QFAC brick during % of Conc. HCl
a durability test using hydrochloric acid, the loss of weight Fig. 7. Comparison of durability under various % of HCl.
varied from 1.11% to 2.1% (Fig. 8), which was less when
compared with the percentage of erosion of clay brick. It
was confirmed that the mechanical properties of QFAC 3,5
3,13
brick increases as it gets aged, thus indirectly increasing the 2,91
3
durability of the structure. 2,54
2,5

Loss in Weight %
2,1
1,94
2
Conclusion 1,5 Clay Brick
1,11
QFAC Brick
k
1
Based on various tests conducted on clay brick and
QFAC brick (230×105×75 mm), it was concluded that the 0,5
QFAC brick was comparatively better in all aspects such as 0
strength, economy, and environment. QFAC bricks con- 1% 2% 3%
sume less energy during the manufacturing process and do % of Conc.H2SO4

not emit greenhouse gases. These are durable, and have low Fig. 8. Comparison of durability under various % of H2SO4.
water absorption and low thermal conductivity. The com-
pressive strength of QFAC brick is 7.95 N/mm2 at 28 days
of curing, which is 15% higher than that of conventional clay bricks. The 28 days flexural strength of QFAC brick
(2.299 N/mm2) was twice than that of conventional clay
bricks. The water absorption of QFAC bricks decreased
9 gradually from 14.2% for 7 days curing to 7.96% for 28
8 8 days curing, indicating favorable values within 20% of its
Number of broken Pieces

7 self weight. The thermal conductivity of the QFAC bricks

7 7 7 7
6 6 resulted in negligible differences compared to clay bricks
5 5 and maintained the same standard. The QFAC bricks pos-
4 QFAC brick sess high durability and good impact resistance. Hence the
3 3 clay brick QFAC brick of attempted material, composition, and size is
2 an environmentally sustainable and an amiable alternative
1 to clay bricks.
0
0 7 14 21 28
Number of days of curing
References
Fig. 5. Comparison of impact resistance on bricks.
1. SHRIKANT S., JAHAGIRDAR., SHRIHARI S., MANU
B. Utilization of Textile Mill Sludge in Burnt Clay Bricks.
35 International Journal of Environmental Protection, 3, (5), 6,
2013.
34 2. ZHANG L. Production of bricks from waste materials – A
33
Review. Construction and Building Materials, 47, 643, 2013.
Temperature oC

3. CHAN C.-M. Effect of Natural Fibres Inclusion in Clay

32 Bricks: Physico-Mechanical Properties. International Journal
Clay Brick
of Civil and Environmental Engineering. 3, (1), 51, 2011.
31 QFAC Brick
4. VILLEDA MUNOZ G., CASTANEDA MIRANDA A.,
PLESS R. C., VEGA DURAN J. T., PINEDA PINON J.
30
Clay-brick firing in a high-temperature solar furnace.
29 Ingenieria Investigacion Technologia, 12, (4), 395, 2010.
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 5. TURGUT P., YESILATA B. Physico-mechanical and ther-
Time (min) mal performances of newly developed rubber-added bricks.
Fig. 6. Comparison of thermal conductivity of bricks. Energ. Buildings, 40, 679, 2008.
A Study on Structural Applicability...
6. SHAKIR A. A., NAGANATHAN S., BIN MUSTAPHA K.
N. Development of Bricks From Waste Material: A Review
Paper. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 7,
(8), 812, 2013.
7. KAYALI O. High performance bricks from fly ash, World of
coal ash (WOCA), Lexington, Kentucky, April 11-15, 2005.
8. SALLA S., PITRODA J. Comparative Review on: Effect of
Natural Fibres Inclusion in Fly Ash Bricks. Indian Journal of
Research, 1, (12), 62,
9. SHAKIR A. A., NAGANATHAN S., BIN MUSTAPHA K.
N. Effect of quarry dust and billet scale additions on the
properties of fly ash bricks. IJST, Transactions B of Civil
Engineering, 38, 51, 2014.
10. KADIR A. A., ZAHARI N. A. M., MARDI N. A.
Utilization of Palm Oil Waste into Fired Clay Brick.
Advances in Environmental Biology, 7, (12), 3826, 2013.
11. SUHAS V., PATIL, SURYAKANT C. NAWLE, SUNIL J.
KULKARNI Industrial Applications of Fly ash: A Review.
International Journal of Science, Engineering and
Technology Research, 2, (9), 2013.
12. JAYASINGHE C., MALLAWAARACHCHI R.S. Flexural
strength of compressed stabilized earth masonry materials.
Mater. Design. 30, 3859, 2009.
13. SALLEHAN ISMAIL, ZAITON YAACOB Properties of
Laterite Brick Reinforced with Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunch
Fibres. Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol. 19, (1), 33, 2011.
699
14. PAVIA S., HANLEY R. Flexural bond strength of natural
hydraulic lime mortar and clay brick. Mater. Struct. 43, 913,
2010.
15. IS 3495 (Part 1 to 4): 1992, Indian standard Methods of tests
of Burnt Clay Building Bricks.
16. ASTM C67 – 13, Standard Test Methods for Sampling and
Testing Brick and Structural Clay Tile.
17. CUSTODIO-GARCIA E., SEBASTIAN P.J., CAMPOS
ALVAREZ J., TREVINO PLACIOS C. G., ZARATE E. A.,
CORDOVAA Q. A., DE LA O-LEON H. Solar conduction
heat transfer in fired clay bricks. Sol. Energ. Mat. Sol. C. 88,
169, 2005.
18. JEYASEHAR A. C., SARAVANAN G., RAMAKRISH-
NAN A.K., KANDASAMY S. Strength and durability stud-
ies on fly ash based geopolymer bricks. Asian Journal of
Civil Engineering. 14, (6), 797, 2013.
19. KADIR A. A., MOHAJERANI A., RODDICK F., BUCK-
ERIDGE J. Density, Strength, Thermal Conductivity and
Leachate Characteristics of Light-Weight Fired Clay Bricks
Incorporating Cigarette Butts. World Academy of Science,
Engineering and Technology. 3, 1312, 2009.
20. ALI M. OTHMAN Experimental Investigations of the
Effect of Some Insulating Materials on the Compressive
Strength, Water Absorption and Thermal Conductivity of
Building Bricks. Jordan Journal of Mechanical and
Industrial Engineering. 4, (4), 443, 2010.